Also military title and Royal patronages. He will have to face sexual assault charges as a private citizen.
-
ToastedCheese — 4 years ago(January 14, 2022 02:02 PM)
Are you drunk or stoned sweetie pie? Like SophieTwerp, you just want an excuse to be outraged and will make up shortsighted and deluded stories to suit your distorted narrative that is far from the truth.
Moron!
Norman! What did you put in my tea? -
ToastedCheese — 4 years ago(January 15, 2022 09:45 AM)
I'm yet to hear an argument from you, to back up my comments that you decided to insult first.
I guess blob, what is in the refrigerator takes precedence in you life over everything else.
Norman! What did you put in my tea? -
ToastedCheese — 4 years ago(January 15, 2022 09:59 AM)
How can you see anything amongst all those folds of flesh? Not to mention you don't even have a brain to be able to think. Or perhaps you may have a dried up peabrain, and even that is an insult to a pea.
Norman! What did you put in my tea? -
Blahgone — 4 years ago(January 15, 2022 10:18 AM)
Right, first of all, where do you get the impression that I am some obese heifer? I am not. Secondly, you have no awareness. You think you have everyone fooled with a sock. You're a moron. Probably the biggest one (physically and mentally) on this site.
-
soapbox original gangster — 4 years ago(January 14, 2022 02:01 PM)
the case involves both criminal and civil. the civil part involves an agreement epstein and the plaintiff/victum agreed to 13 years ago. key point is epstein and guiffre did in secret. at no time did epstein consult with any of his "mates" and include them by name in this very sweeping agreement which released epstein from any future legal claims. on the flip side Guiffre also agreed to the terms. the most telling part is that the terms prevented both parties– OR any parties in the agreement– from ever using anything in the agreement in any future legal proceeding in any court in any jurisdiction in any country.
the now ex-Prince argued that he was granted immunity by implication because epstein kinda threw a lifeline to his fellow party boys when the agreement mentioned "future defendants" would also be released from future lawsuits. The civil case rests on this. if Epstein's agreement immunized andrew, clinton, trump, etc. who were part of epstein's circle jerk of pervs, then the case gets dismissed and he, andrew, gets to wear his medals and go riding at the queen's estate.
a new york federal judge has ruled that the case will proceed to trial. Andrew moved to dismiss the case on grounds of civil immunity. the judge finds that under local Florida contract law-the civil case part- epstein's agreement does not grant immunity to andrew by name or by explicit inference. In the future at trial, another judge or this same judge may rule differently. But at this earliest stage, the case goes on.
the criminal case involves new york law. Guiffre claims andrew assaulted her in new york city. so the state laws apply. the agreement between epstein was consecrated in florida where i assume epstein felt he had more pull and influence. he will most likely lose a criminal trial at either the state level or on appeal to federal if the state appeals fail.
if andrew settles, it's over. the queen will not restore his titles and peerage because a settlement carries nasty overtones of guilt. If andrew goes to trial, his attorneys can move to dismiss, again. If andrew fails to respond and not mount a defense, then Guiffre can make a play for summary judgement. There's no appeal against summary judgement. The court will then issue a claim against andrew's assests. at that point, andrew will invoke british law to protect his ass and assets against forfeiture. Had the queen NOT stripped him of title, possible his assets be protected.
one thing i see is that the plaintiff/victim retained top shelf A-Team legal reps and the then Prince andrew 9th in line to the crown of monarchy and flush with royal cash appears to have hired bottom of the barrel legal clowns who have taken his money and left him swinging by his balls.
The new york federal court ruling shooting down andrew's last gasp at keeping this thing from moving forward
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21177495/prince-andrew-motion-denied.pdf -
ToastedCheese — 4 years ago(January 14, 2022 02:31 PM)
If you wrote that informative explanation yourself, thank you for taking the time to explain some of the confounded legalities behind it all.
I will read through that transcript link later.
I really can’t see Andrew being taken down with a powerful Monarchy behind him though, even if technically stripped of his royal command and honours. There are too many influential connections and reputations at stake. This is a showcase fiasco for judicial relevance, not about justice! The line here is way too blurry.
High class hooker Guiffre is going to come away with a hefty sum no matter what and it will be what she wants too.
Norman! What did you put in my tea?
